| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/09/2007 05:58:50 PM · #1 |
| I am planning on starting a website so clients can view my work only. Kind of like an online portfolio. My work is of concerts so would I need to copyright my pictures even though they would only be for viewing? |
|
|
|
12/09/2007 06:03:51 PM · #2 |
DPC Copyright Tut
You can find a treasure of info on this site.
|
|
|
|
12/09/2007 06:26:38 PM · #3 |
if you can view a picture online you can steal it one way or another. You may just want to use it for viewing but the person that is always looking for ways to make a buck will take it and use it anyway possible.
People are trying to change the laws to make it easier for people to use work that isn't copywritten or doesn't have the artist info on it. I would advise using a watermark if possible but even those aren't fool proof. About the best way is to register your images to the copyright office and then if someone uses it you can possible sue them for it.
Good luck |
|
|
|
12/09/2007 08:27:41 PM · #4 |
//www.copyright.gov/ should answer just about all your copyright questions as far as the law goes.
If you're asking about model release issues (posting/selling photos of people) that's a totally different issue. |
|
|
|
12/11/2007 09:03:51 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by sabphoto:
if you can view a picture online you can steal it one way or another. You may just want to use it for viewing but the person that is always looking for ways to make a buck will take it and use it anyway possible.
People are trying to change the laws to make it easier for people to use work that isn't copywritten or doesn't have the artist info on it. I would advise using a watermark if possible but even those aren't fool proof. About the best way is to register your images to the copyright office and then if someone uses it you can possible sue them for it.
Good luck |
All images immediatly have your copyright once taken. Registring them and watermarking them just give you more leverage in court. You can still sue people if they use an image of yours that isnt registered. Its just easier to prove its yours if registered, at least it used to be when jpg images were all that digital cameras could produce.
Of course now days with proprietary raw image formats if you produce an original RAW capture and the camera used to take it there is no argueing the image is yours. |
|
|
|
12/11/2007 11:35:32 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Kaveran:
Originally posted by sabphoto:
if you can view a picture online you can steal it one way or another. You may just want to use it for viewing but the person that is always looking for ways to make a buck will take it and use it anyway possible.
People are trying to change the laws to make it easier for people to use work that isn't copywritten or doesn't have the artist info on it. I would advise using a watermark if possible but even those aren't fool proof. About the best way is to register your images to the copyright office and then if someone uses it you can possible sue them for it.
Good luck |
All images immediatly have your copyright once taken. Registring them and watermarking them just give you more leverage in court. You can still sue people if they use an image of yours that isnt registered. Its just easier to prove its yours if registered, at least it used to be when jpg images were all that digital cameras could produce.
Of course now days with proprietary raw image formats if you produce an original RAW capture and the camera used to take it there is no argueing the image is yours. |
The big advantage of registration is that it allows you to recover punitive damages and court costs, which, should an infringement case actually go to trial, could run several thousands of dollars. Otherwise, you're only entitled to actual damages.
It also clears up any potential issues over image ownership, despite the advances in RAW files etc. Those files are NOT proof of copyright, only proof that you have an original file. |
|
|
|
12/11/2007 12:18:41 PM · #7 |
Another question worth asking regards the fact that these photos were taken at concerts. Although you have automatic copyright of the photographs themselves, the performer has automatic copyright in his or her performance, and your right to redistribute the images may still be restricted.
Were you at these concerts as an official photographer, a press photographer, an attendee who bought a ticket, or something else?
~Terry
|
|
|
|
12/11/2007 01:11:25 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
Another question worth asking regards the fact that these photos were taken at concerts. Although you have automatic copyright of the photographs themselves, the performer has automatic copyright in his or her performance, and your right to redistribute the images may still be restricted.
Were you at these concerts as an official photographer, a press photographer, an attendee who bought a ticket, or something else?
~Terry |
That's a separate issue. But, yes, you would need permission (release) from the performer to display their likeness on the web at large. Most performers don't care about fan sites and the like, since it increases their fame to a degree, but some do and have forced the sites to remove images under threat of legal action. |
|
|
|
12/11/2007 01:13:36 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The big advantage of registration is that it allows you to recover punitive damages and court costs, which, should an infringement case actually go to trial, could run several thousands of dollars. Otherwise, you're only entitled to actual damages.
It also clears up any potential issues over image ownership, despite the advances in RAW files etc. Those files are NOT proof of copyright, only proof that you have an original file. |
Good points Spazmo99.
The copywrite submission guidlines are a bit weak (at least in my initial reading of them) as to submitting multiple images. I did see that all images in a given submission must have been created in the same calendar year but I dint see any specifics on image size or usable media for the submission.
Ive seen elsewhere looking into the subject that small, 150kb thumbs are fine and you can pack a CD/DVD full of them for the submission to the copyright office. Have you actually done this before and how large where your images and di you send in a CD or DVD? |
|
|
|
12/11/2007 01:48:26 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Kaveran:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
The big advantage of registration is that it allows you to recover punitive damages and court costs, which, should an infringement case actually go to trial, could run several thousands of dollars. Otherwise, you're only entitled to actual damages.
It also clears up any potential issues over image ownership, despite the advances in RAW files etc. Those files are NOT proof of copyright, only proof that you have an original file. |
Good points Spazmo99.
The copywrite submission guidlines are a bit weak (at least in my initial reading of them) as to submitting multiple images. I did see that all images in a given submission must have been created in the same calendar year but I dint see any specifics on image size or usable media for the submission.
Ive seen elsewhere looking into the subject that small, 150kb thumbs are fine and you can pack a CD/DVD full of them for the submission to the copyright office. Have you actually done this before and how large where your images and di you send in a CD or DVD? |
I made 150Kb images and I've sent in just CD's, mostly because I didn't have any DVD's and at 150Kb, you can get many images onto one disk. |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 07:14:23 AM · #11 |
Wow!! a lot of great information. Regarding the question about redistributing the pictures. I am not selling the pictures at all.
My intent is to only use a website as a portfolio to given an employer another way to view my work.
I did notice that I can put my photo's on a CD to submission for copyright but I was not sure how to go about it, this information is great. Thank you. |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 09:12:49 AM · #12 |
Is there any option for PS to process photos in batches? IrfanView has that option, I can add text to any location of the image in batches, but there is no watermark option. Can PS do the batch process? Or is there any other program that I can add the watermark in batches?
Thanks |
|
|
|
12/15/2007 10:59:13 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by FocusPoint:
Is there any option for PS to process photos in batches? IrfanView has that option, I can add text to any location of the image in batches, but there is no watermark option. Can PS do the batch process? Or is there any other program that I can add the watermark in batches?
Thanks |
You can create an action in PS to automate tasks. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 07/19/2025 03:13:59 PM EDT.
